NSPCC: Do We Need An Abuse Industry?

Yes, of course we do.

But it is too big.

The organism has become a monster, and it is feeding off the broken lives
that it, itself, is creating. The abuse industry needs to be cut down to size so that it only has the
wherewithal to deal with serious cases of abuse. As with most
things in life, it is all a question of balance.

And the laws and the various definitions also need adjustment so that
innocent people - and also those who have not done anything seriously bad - are
not dragged through such a horrible mill.

Once again, it is all a question of balance.

'Men' should also not permit the abuse industry to demonise them so horribly.

'Men' should also not permit the abuse industry to demonise them so horribly.

Women, gays, blacks, Muslims, Jews - whoever - would be outraged if they were
continually being portrayed in the manner (and with the frequency) which men
have to endure.

There would be permanent riots in the streets!

Unfortunately, however, while many
men have finally woken up to the way in which 'men' are continually being portrayed in
a bad light in, say, advertisements and sitcoms, they do not yet seem to have
cottoned on to the fact that the portrayal of 'men' by the abuse industry is far
more pervasive and far more damaging.

we should not allow the abuse industry to damage
victims of abuse even further

Furthermore, we should not allow the abuse industry to damage victims of abuse
even further by injecting over and over again into their minds the thoroughly
debilitating and self-fulfilling notion that they are doomed to suffer for life.

Unless they have lost a limb, caught some crippling disease, or experienced some
long-term excruciating pain - or something similar -
there is no intrinsic mechanism in normal humans that forces them to suffer long
term from short-term incidents of what is nowadays alleged to be 'abuse'; apart,
that is, from those psychological mechanisms that will respond in concordance with any continued
deluge of convincing propaganda that tells them that they are doomed forever to
suffer.

Such propaganda instils considerable fear, anxiety and depression in the
very people whom those in the abuse industry would claim they are so concerned
about.

Of course, victims of abuse - children or adults - might be horrendously damaged by their
various ordeals, but when those in the abuse industry make blanket pronouncements suggesting that
all cases of 'abuse' lead inevitably to significant permanent psychological harm, then they are talking absolute nonsense and damaging
the most vulnerable victims in the process.

Most unwanted sexual abuse, for example, is probably a bit like having a car accident of some sort.

It might cause long term permanent damage - e.g. a major road crash - or virtually nothing at all - e.g. a minor scratch on the hood.

It is the abuse industry that always tries to make
matters sound far worse

Most acts of 'abuse' as currently defined by those working in the abuse
industry are, like most car accidents, relatively trivial. It is those
working in the abuse industry who always try to make matters sound far worse in order to gain extra
funding - and also in order to demonise men.

And, in doing this, not only does it damage people's relationships, it causes significant harm to victims of
both serious and trivial 'abuse'.

The long term negative effects of abuse - or indeed of any psychological 'unpleasantness' - can probably be summarised thus ...

Long Term Harm = Total Duration of Negative Experiences x Degree of Unpleasantness of Negative Experiences

But, you can add two further factors to the equation, both of which are concerned with the recalling and the cognitive reprocessing of past experiences and both of which are mightily fuelled by the
abuse industry ...

Long Term Harm = Total Duration of Negative Experiences x Degree of Unpleasantness
of Negative Experiences (i.e. as per above) + Total Duration of
Recalling Negative Experiences x Degree of Unpleasantness During Recall of Negative Experiences

Or, to put it simply, ...

Long Term Suffering = Total Unpleasantness of Experiences + Total Unpleasantness of
Recalling those Experiences

And these days, thanks to the abuse industry, the latter
variable (the recall of unpleasant experiences) produces umpteen
times more misery for the victims of abuse than did the experiences themselves.

And this is not even to mention the 'reinterpretation' of what actually
happened coupled with the added fear of what it might all mean for the
future.

In other words, more Maths.

Long Term Suffering = Total Unpleasantness of Experiences + Total Unpleasantness of
Recalling those Experiences + Negative Reinterpretation of those
Experiences + Fear of the Consequences of those Experiences.

And the bits in yellow are those things that are purposely inflamed by the abuse
industry on a daily basis.

As such, they weigh far more heavily than the original incidents themselves.

But, unfortunately, for victims of abuse, the matter does not actually stop there.

There are other factors that come into play thanks to
the various shenanigans of the abuse industry.

There are other factors that come into play thanks to the various shenanigans of the abuse industry.

For example, tricking abuse victims into believing that they have been psychologically damaged for life by their experiences causes them further significant harm
above and beyond that which is directly associated with their abuse (e.g.
they might take up smoking, drink a great deal, lose sleep because of worry about the future,
blame their parents etc etc) and it also imbues them with a sense of hopelessness with regard to dealing with any other problems that they might have, whether or not these problems, in reality, have anything to do with their past
abuse - e.g. I am depressed/useless because I was once abused; and, as such, there is
nothing that I can do. I am doomed to suffer from the past.

Indeed, I can think of hardly anything that is more disgusting than watching
the NSPCC damage the entire well-being of children who have been abused
by persistently telling them that their 'lives are ruined' - or words to that
effect. It is absolutely outrageous that they should be allowed to get away with
doing this.

They don't care about these children at all. They just want people's money.
And they are quite prepared to seriously damage the well-being of children -
even of abused children - in order to get their hands on this money.

What kind of people would do this?

Some time ago, I was often in the company of a child with a missing limb. As I looked at her,
I often found myself reflecting on what it would mean for her if she was going to be brought up in a society wherein highfaluting so-called child 'experts'
and grand police officers kept appearing in the media to tell her that her life was going to be
permanently damaged and ruined
significantly because of her handicap.

Your life is ruined Young Lady.

You are damaged for life.

Your life is ruined Young Lady.

You are damaged for life.

Your life is ruined Young Lady.

You are damaged for life.

And these people claim that they care about children!

Bullsh#t!

Take it from me, they don't.

They do not give children a second thought.

If that was my daughter in the above photograph and some child 'experts' kept
telling her that her life was going to be ruined as a result of her disability,
I'd shoot them!

As I've said so many times before: The abuse industry - this 'organism' -
does not care about children. It does not care about
people. It does not care about victims of abuse. It does not care
about society.

Finally, if you have any doubts about my claims above, ask yourself
these two questions.

1. If your daughter was abused by some stranger or other, would you
persistently tell her that her life was now ruined?

2. If your son had some type of cancer - benign or otherwise - would
you persistently tell him that, henceforth, he would be undergoing
terrible experiences throughout his entire life?

And if you did do these things, and the victims believed you, what
effect do you think that you would have on their lives?

Beware the Nocebo Effect by By Paul Enck and Winfried Hauser -
to do with medicines - but take note that when a psychologist - or
a trusted source - tells you that something innocuous will
actually harm you, then it most probably will.

This is the kind of world that the NSPCC and the abuse industry are bringing
to us all.

Finally, on June 30, the 14-year-old came before magistrates at Huntingdon Youth Court. It was only then, the family claim, that police agreed to drop the reference to the assault being 'of a sexual nature'.

(Esther Rantzen was a pioneer in setting up
systems to protect children from abuse. She is a feminist - and, probably, was
one of the best-known media personalities in the UK throughout the 70s, 80s and
90s.

The irony is that, to an extent, I blame myself for this rubbish. By revealing the extent of child abuse in the BBC TV programme Childwatch in the Eighties, I was part of the revolution in child protection which created these insidious
jobsworths.

... What a tragedy if, even from the best of motives, we deprive ourselves and our children of the affection and fun that make childhood so precious.

The above piece by Esther Rantzen is of major
significance when it comes to the campaign against all the child abuse
propaganda that persistently poisons all our relationships -
especially those of men - and which is largely promulgated by people in various
groups - including the government - whose main aim is to serve themselves in
some way.

And, while on this subject, regular readers
will know that there is a mountain of evidence all over this website supporting
the contention that there are many groups colluding with each other in order to
profit from the stirring up of relationship breakdown - with governments and
organisations like the NSPCC profiting to the tune of tens of
billions of dollars every year by stirring up abuse hysteria.

Well, here is a piece by European Member of
Parliament, Danial Hannan, pointing out to us something that, I think, most of
us did not know. Well, I certainly didn't ...

Notice that the NSPCC is being given large
sums of money out of the European coffers.

In other words, our European governmental
bureaucrats are piling millions of pounds into an organisation - the NSPCC -
which thrives only by stirring up abuse hysteria.

In essence, via the NSPCC, these governmental
officials are fuelling a huge mountain of hatred, relationship breakdown and
societal disharmony - from which they benefit.

(You surely don't seriously think, for
one minute, that government officials would actually spend huge sums of
money on projects that took away their own jobs, pensions and expense
accounts, do you?)

And, if you read the article, you will also
discover that the NSPCC is active in supporting the increase in growth and power
of the European government.

What a surprise, eh?

This is not democracy at work.

We are all being cheated.

The government in Europe is handing over
millions of dollars of our money to groups that will actively
promote itself! And it is also handing over our money to groups that
will stir up societal disharmony, from which, of course, it stands to profit
even more hugely.

In other words, this racket is
positively enormous.

...

Two commercials seen in San Diego ... posted on SYG

#1: Man is having a pleasant conversation in an elevator with a woman. The
elevator door opens and he leaves, walking his child out with him. The back of
his shirt has written on it in bold letters, "Child Abuser". The woman
in the elevator looks dumbfounded as the man walks away. A voiceover says
something like, "If only child abuse were this easy to spot."

#2: Man is walking his child out of school through a crowd of people. He
walks by a woman, who turns and looks back at him. Again, in bold lettering on
the back of his shirt is, "Child Abuser." Again, the voiceover,
"If only child abuse were this easy to spot."

The idea behind this poster is to raise suspicions whenever people see
a man holding a child's hand.

Yep; even holding a child's hand will soon be seen as 'inappropriate'
when it comes to men.

And so men will become even more reluctant to hold a child's hand.

Indeed, I'm not quite sure just how much more disgusting these
so-called children's charities can get.